J Brown-Simpson v Arbor Academy Trust: 3213547/2020
| Judgment Date | 28 April 2021 |
| Citation | 3213547/2020 |
| Published date | 10 May 2021 |
| Court | Employment Tribunal |
| Subject Matter | Unfair Dismissal |
Case Number: 3213547/2020 V
1 of 18
EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: Janice Brown -Simpson
Respondent: Arbor Academy Trust
Heard at: East London Hearing Centre (by Cloud Video Platform)
On: 27 & 28 April 2021
Before: Employment Judge S Knight
Representation
Claimant: Susanna Thompson (Regional Officer, NASUWT)
Respondent: Sarah Bowen (3PB)
JUDGMENT
1. The Respondent unfairly dismissed the Claimant.
2. The Respondent is ordered to pay the Claimant £27,032.82.
3. For the purposes of the Employment Pr otection (Recoupment of Benefits)
Regulations 1996:
(1) The total monetary award for unfair dismissal is £27,032.82.
(2) The prescribed element is £16,075.30.
(3) The prescribed element relates to 1 September 2020 to 28 April 2021.
(4) The amount by which the total monetary award for unfair dismissal
exceeds the prescribed element is £10,957.52.
Case Number: 3213547/2020 V
2 of 18
REASONS
Introduction
The parties
1. The Claimant was employed by the Respondent as a teacher at Northwold
Primary School (“the School”). She was originally employed by another
employer, but her employment was transferred to the Respondent. She is treated
as having been employed by the Respondent between 1 September 2016 and
31 August 2020. She was employed as an unqualified teacher under the
Overseas Teacher Training (“OTT”) scheme.
The claims
2. The Claimant claims for unfair dismissal arising out of her dismissal on 31 August
2020. The dismissal was at the conclusion of a 4-year fixed term contract. The
Respondent says that the Claimant was dismissed either because of her
capability, or because of some other substantial reason. The Respondent says
the other substantial reason was either: (1) the expiry of the fixed term contract;
or (2) the Claimant failing to reach the necessary standard of teaching and obtain
Qualified Teacher Status (“QTS”) within the fixed term period.
3. On 10 July 2020 ACAS was notified of the Claimant’s claim under the early
conciliation procedure. On 12 August 2020 ACAS issued the early conciliation
certificate. On 31 August 2020 the Claimant’s employment ended. On 13
November 2020 the ET1 Claim Form was presented in time. On or around 2
February 2021 the ET3 Response Form was sent to the Tribunal.
The issues
4. At the start of the hearing, the parties agreed to a list of issues. It appears at
Annex 1 to these Reasons.
Procedure, documents, and evidence heard
Procedure
5. This has been a remote hearing which has been consented to by the parties. The
form of remote hearing was “V: video whether partly (someone physically in a
hearing centre) or fully (all remote)”. A face-to-face hearing was not held because
it was not practicable due to the COVID-19 pandemic and no-one requested the
same. The documents that I was referred to are in a bundle, the contents of which
I have recorded.
6. All participants attended the hearing through Cloud Video Platform.
7. At the start of the hearing I checked whether any reasonable adjustments were
required. Those in attendance confirmed that none were required.
To continue reading
Request your trial